Teaching Lab All Partners Report: Matched
2020-2021 Report
Background
In SY20-21, Teaching Lab administered online diagnostic and follow-up surveys of educators participating in Teaching Lab’s professional learning in order to measure growth and improvement in three different areas: 1) Educator Mindsets and Beliefs, 2) School Environment, and 3) Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge. There were 0 educators who completed the diagnostic survey, 0 educators who completed the follow-up survey, and 0 educators who completed both.
Summary of Results
Methodology and Presentation of Results
We have provided two types of results for each section: The results in the first three columns of the table refer to the overall group averages. We provide the group average for the diagnostic and follow-up surveys as well as the percentage point change (increase or decrease) over this time. It is important to note that the group that completed the diagnostic survey and the group that completed the follow-up survey are different in size. The results in the fourth column reflect the percentage of educators who improved their responses or sustained the highest level response from the diagnostic to follow-up survey. This group of educators is the same for both surveys and is smaller in size.
Section 1: Mindsets and Beliefs
Educators were asked a series of questions about their mindsets toward instruction and students on a 5-point Likert scale from 1- Strongly disagree to 5- Strongly agree. The questions focused on four core constructs surrounding mindsets and beliefs, specifically the recognition of race and culture, growth mindsets, high expectations, and taking accountability for equitable instruction.
1
| Educators’ Averages Scores on Equitable Mindsets and Beliefs, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with Equitable Mindsets & Beliefs | ||||
| Overall score | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Recognition of race & culture | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Holding growth mindsets | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Having high expectations and beliefs | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Taking accountability for equitable instruction | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 0 to 0
2
n = 0
|
||||
The plot illustrates educators’ average scores from the diagnostic and follow-up surveys, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the average scores.
Section 2: School Environment
Educators were asked about their school environment, including culture and climate on a 5-point Likert scale from 1- Strongly disagree to 5- Strongly agree. Specifically, educators were asked about trust and connectedness to other educators, their role in shaping their own professional learning, and confidence in implementing the curriculum in a way that maximizes positive impact for student learning.
2
| Educators’ Perceptions of School Culture and Climate, by Survey Administration, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with Positive Perceptions of School Culture and Climate | ||||
| Overall score | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Trust in fellow teachers | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Connectedness to fellow teachers | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Have influence over professional learning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| I am confident that I am implementing the curriculum in a way that maximizes positive impact for student learning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 0 to 0
2
n = 0
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shifts in educators’ reported culture and climate, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the percentage of educators with positive perceptions in the diagnostic survey, and blue represents the percentage in the follow-up survey. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the percent of educators who agreed or strongly agreed with the items.
Section 3: Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Educators were asked a series of questions about their knowledge of instructional shifts and evidence-based instructional practices in their content area.
Section 3a: ELA Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge
In ELA, the questions focused on seven core constructs, as shown in the table.
| Educators’ Average Scores on ELA Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with ELA Content & Pedagogical Content Knowledge | ||||
| Overall score | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| ELA instructional shifts | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Fluency | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Text complexity | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Close reading | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Building knowledge | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Supporting students with unfinished learning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 0 to 0
2
n = 0
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shift in educators’ average scores for ELA content and pedagogical content knowledge, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease of average scores.
Section 3b: Math Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge
In Mathematics, the questions focused on four core constructs, as shown in the table.
| Educators’ Average Scores on Math Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Educators with Math Content & Pedagogical Content Knowledge | ||||
| Overall score | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Math instructional shifts | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Equitable Math Instruction | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Supporting students with unfinished learning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Effective Teaching Practices | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 0 to 0
2
n = 0
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shift in educators’ average scores for Math content and pedagogical content knowledge, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease of average scores.
Section 4: Teacher Practices
Coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were asked about the areas they focus on when observing teachers in general and also whether they observe differences in teaching practices between teachers who have participated in Teaching Lab professional learning and teachers who have not.
First, coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were asked whether they focus on the following areas when observing teachers: The lesson is focused on a high-quality text or task. The questions and tasks address the analytical thinking required by the grade-level standards. All students have opportunities to engage in the work of the lesson.
| Observation Practices of Coaches, Leaders, and Administrators, by Survey Administration, by Survey Administration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of Coaches, Leaders, and Administrators who Agreed or Strongly Agreed | ||||
| When observing teachers, I focus on… Overall score | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Whether the lesson is focused on a high-quality text or task | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Whether the questions and tasks address the analytical thinking required by the grade-level standards | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
| Whether all students have opportunities to engage in the work of the lesson | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN |
|
1
Note: The number of observations varies between items from 0 to 0
2
n = 0
|
||||
The plot illustrates the shifts in coaches, leaders, and/or administrators’ reported observation practices, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the percentage who always or almost always focus on these aspects in the diagnostic survey, and blue represents the percentage in the follow-up survey. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the percent of educators who always or almost always focus on these aspects.
Coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were also asked to compare teaching practices between Teaching Lab participants and non-Teaching Lab participants in the follow-up survey. They were asked about the same three areas above.
| Differences in Teaching Practices between Teaching Lab Participants and Non-participants, as Reported by Coaches, Leaders, and Administrators | ||
|---|---|---|
| TL Teachers | Non-TL Teachers | |
| The lesson is focused on a high-quality text or task | NaN | NaN |
| The questions and tasks address the analytical thinking required by the grade-level standards | NaN | NaN |
| All students have opportunities to engage in the work of the lesson | NaN | NaN |
The graph illustrates the differences in teaching practices between teachers who have participated in Teaching Lab professional learning and teachers who have not, as reported by the coaches, leaders, and/or administrators.
Section 5: Lab Leaders
Lab Leaders were asked about their engagement in different activities, such as leading professional learning, leading PLC meetings, coaching teachers, sharing information and resources, and improving their own instructional practices.
The graph below illustrates the Lab Leaders participation in different activities.
Section 6: Student Work
No student work was analyzed at this location.
Section 7: Classroom observations
TBD
Section 8: Participant Feedback
Looking at participant feedback from Delaware Department of Education, DE we see good scores across the board:
| Teaching Lab Performance on Participant Feedback Questions for Delaware Department of Education, DE | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How Likely Are You To Apply This Learning To Your Practice In The Next 4-6 Weeks? | I felt a sense of community with the other participants in this course even though we were meeting virtually. | This course helped me navigate remote and/or hybrid learning during COVID-19. | % Who Say Activities Of Today's Session Were Well-Designed To Help Me Learn | S/He Effectively Built A Community Of Learners |
| 91% | 96% | 65% | NaN | 96% |
Finally, looking at the textual feedback from participants we also see a lot of positive feedback, even when people are giving tips for improvement
Comments on Improving Experience
[[1]]
[1] "<footer>A little more time for the asynchronous work. I felt very rushed to complete the activity and probably would have done a better job if I had more time.</footer>"
[[2]]
[1] "<footer>I wish that we could have talked a bit more about how this would look in an online classroom.</footer>"
[[3]]
[1] "<footer>BO rooms seem to consistently have the same people in them across MCL sessions. I wonder if Zoom has an algorithm for randomness based on people's names? I'd like to get to talk with some different coaching colleagues.</footer>"
[[4]]
[1] "<footer>My bad, but I watched the entire second video which gave me a different IPG rating than others. Is there a way to only give a video the length you want us to see and associated materials? I felt very time pressured today during asynchronous work.</footer>"
[[5]]
[1] "<footer>Due to the current circumstances in our district - I am unable to apply a lot of the great information at this current time. I would love the opportunity to discuss strategies that districts are using during virtual/hybrid learning to promote reading and writing and share successes.</footer>"
[[6]]
[1] "<footer>In person learning instead of Zoom, but this was very well done and I am not complaining!</footer>"
[[7]]
[1] "<footer>Due to the current circumstances in our district, I am unable to apply a lot of the great information at this current time. I would love the opportunity to discuss strategies that districts are using during virtual/hybrid learning to promote reading and writing and share successes.</footer>"
[[8]]
[1] "<footer>I struggle with having enough time to complete the asynchronous work in a way that allows me time to deeply think about the materials and/or readings. This has been since day 1 and I thought I would just get quicker, but I did not. Typically, I finish the work with 7 minutes for lunch. I thought you might like some feedback for cohort 2</footer>"
[[9]]
[1] "<footer>In person learning instead of Zoom - but this was very well done and I am not complaining!</footer>"Additional Comments
[[1]]
[1] "<footer>Thank you for being so well planned and for considering our feedback when developing the structure of the day. It's hard to keep people motivated for an entire day of PL, but you do a nice job of balancing everything to keep us engaged.</footer>"
[[2]]
[1] "<footer>I appreciate this time, as it loads my coaching tool box. At this time it's just really hard to engage teachers, but what Nicole, Renee, and Lindsey said; something like, what's the small thing we can do to relieve the stress steered also towards pushing teachers to best practice? This is a good mindset and I thank you for your support!</footer>"
[[3]]
[1] "<footer>Would like additional resources on the progression examples in the CVA Progressions Worksheet. Are there any resources out there? Has anyone done this with different common core topics/stands?</footer>"
[[4]]
[1] "<footer>I appreciate everything that you a doing to help us do our job effectively with teachers.</footer>"
[[5]]
[1] "<footer>Thank you for creating a collaborative culture where everyone's voice is heard and we can all feel comfortable sharing our experiences and ask questions.</footer>"info@teachinglab.org
Comments on what Went Well